L10N migration to transifex.net
tcallawa at redhat.com
Fri Feb 25 01:16:29 UTC 2011
On 02/24/2011 04:58 PM, Ruediger Landmann wrote:
> If the move was acutally the result of a purely authoritarian,
> unilaterial "fiat", why not say so? Sometimes decisions like that are
> indeed necessary in any community, which is why we have leadership -- to
> make tough and sometimes even unpalatable decisions. But if that was
> indeed the case (and I'm still open to the idea that I'm badly
> misreading the situation) -- Why the pretense that it was anything other?
I think you are misreading the situation. The Infrastructure team had
known for a while that there were problems with the Fedora-local
instance of Transifex, and members of the Fedora translator community
were complaining about lack of needed functionality.
It was proposed that since the current local transifex instance was not
a viable solution for providing translations for Fedora 15, that we
consider a move to the hosted tx.net offering (this was also the
recommendation from the transifex upstream, who offered to provide this
to us at no financial cost).
This solution was presented to the Fedora translation community for
consideration (albeit, with not a whole lot of time to decide), and they
decided that was a good plan for F15, with the understanding that we can
(and probably will) revisit this after Fedora 15 is done.
Can we please put this sort of "pre-made decision" or "decision by fiat"
stuff to rest now? There is no attempt to cover anything up, just Fedora
Infrastructure trying to identify and deploy a solution that would
enable Fedora's translators to complete their work for Fedora 15.
More information about the trans